基于主体间性的乌克兰危机解读
|
摘要
冷战结束,欧美与俄罗斯并没有真正地实现增信释疑。为防止俄罗斯再次成为控制欧亚大陆的"欧亚帝国",欧美急需在东欧寻找一个有效制约俄罗斯的战略支点,乌克兰是其最佳选项。对于俄罗斯来说,乌克兰则是其抗衡欧美的前沿哨所和战略缓冲区。首先系统梳理了历史上的乌克兰"危机",并简要介绍了主体间性这一哲学思维的内涵、特点和存在方式,发现了乌克兰危机的主体间属性;其次以主体间性为视角,探究了乌克兰危机发生的根源并从主体间性的物质性、社会性、历史性和实践性对2013年乌克兰危机进行了剖析。得出:乌克兰危机是欧美与俄罗斯两大地缘体在主体间性作用下在东欧交互争夺的必然结果,只要乌克兰作为独立国家存在,其未来危机还会在欧美与俄的主体间性作用下再出现。最后根据乌克兰危机的启示给正在处于大国崛起路上的中国处理朝核危机、南海冲突等周边地缘政治事件提出地缘战略建议。
Since the end of the Cold War, Europe, the United States and Russia have not really increased their trust and doubt. To prevent "authoritarian" Russia to become the "Eurasian Empire" controlling Eurasia once again, Europe and the United States are badly in need of finding a strategic pivot in Eastern Europe that will effectively contain Russia. Ukraine is the best option.For Russia, Ukraine is its frontier post and strategic buffer against Europe and the United States. This paper first briefly introduces the connotation,characteristics and existence of the philosophy of inter-subjectivity, systematically combs the history of the crisis in Ukraine, and finds out the inter-subjectivity implied in it. Secondly, explore the root causes of the crisis in Ukraine from the perspective of inter-subjectivity, and analyze the Ukrainian crisis in 2013 from the substantive, social, historical and practical property of the inter-subjectivity. Finally, it is concluded that the crisis in Ukraine is the inevitable result of the interaction between the two major geopolitics in Europe, the United States and Russia in Eastern Europe under the inter-subjective influence, the United States and Russia. Only if Ukraine exists as an independent nation, the crisis in Ukraine will reappear in the future. At last, according to the enlightenment of the crisis in Ukraine, it will put forward geo-strategic suggestions to China which is on the rise of a great power to solve its surrounding geopolitical events such as the North Korean nuclear crisis and the South China Sea conflict.
Since the end of the Cold War, Europe, the United States and Russia have not really increased their trust and doubt. To prevent "authoritarian" Russia to become the "Eurasian Empire" controlling Eurasia once again, Europe and the United States are badly in need of finding a strategic pivot in Eastern Europe that will effectively contain Russia. Ukraine is the best option.For Russia, Ukraine is its frontier post and strategic buffer against Europe and the United States. This paper first briefly introduces the connotation,characteristics and existence of the philosophy of inter-subjectivity, systematically combs the history of the crisis in Ukraine, and finds out the inter-subjectivity implied in it. Secondly, explore the root causes of the crisis in Ukraine from the perspective of inter-subjectivity, and analyze the Ukrainian crisis in 2013 from the substantive, social, historical and practical property of the inter-subjectivity. Finally, it is concluded that the crisis in Ukraine is the inevitable result of the interaction between the two major geopolitics in Europe, the United States and Russia in Eastern Europe under the inter-subjective influence, the United States and Russia. Only if Ukraine exists as an independent nation, the crisis in Ukraine will reappear in the future. At last, according to the enlightenment of the crisis in Ukraine, it will put forward geo-strategic suggestions to China which is on the rise of a great power to solve its surrounding geopolitical events such as the North Korean nuclear crisis and the South China Sea conflict.
引文
[1]李永全.乌克兰危机折射出的大博弈.俄罗斯学刊,2014(3):5-9.
[2]陈凌雄.美俄较量中的乌克兰危机.观察与思考,2004(24):48.
[3]张文茹.克里米亚回归:俄罗斯的政策选择.和平与发展,2014(2):19-29.
[4]冯玉军.乌克兰危机:多维视野下的深层透视.国际问题研究,2014(3):48-63+131-132.
[5]王军.乌克兰危机的民族政治解读.国际安全研究,2014,32(4):27-38+155-156.
[6]张昕,冯绍雷.乌克兰危机的理论透视.世界经济与政治,2014(6):145-155+160.
[7]戴长征,张中宁.国内囿域下乌克兰危机的根源及其影响.东北亚论坛,2014(5):3-7
[8]丁原洪.乌克兰危机的历史经纬与现实启示.和平与发展,2014(2):1-8+116.
[9]柳丰华.乌克兰危机:内因、大国博弈因素与前景.俄罗斯学刊,2014,4(3):11-20.
[10]柳丰华.俄罗斯对乌克兰政策视角下的乌克兰危机.欧洲研究,2015,33(3):79-90+7.
[11]王志远.乌克兰危机的一种解读-基于国家特征视角的分析.欧洲研究,2015,33(6):114-135+7-8.
[12]胡志丁,刘卫东.论地缘战略的主体间性———兼论中国地缘战略抉择.人文地理,2016(3):122-127.
[13]杨在月,胡志丁,惠凯,等.论地缘战略区位的主体间性——以缅甸为例.世界地理研究,2017,26(2):1-10.
[14]金元浦.论文学的主体间性.天津社会科学,1997(5):85-90.
[15] Pim W Teunissen. When I say inter-subjectivity. Medical Education 2014,48:349-350.
[16] Lill-JohanneEilertsen. Maintaining inter-subjectivity when communication is challenging hearing impairment and complex needs.Research on Language and Social Interaction,2014,47(4):353-379.
[17] A.R. Lacey. A Dictionary of Philosophy. Routledge&Kegan Paul Ltd,1986.
[18]郭湛.论主体间性或交互主体性.中国人民大学学报,2001(3):32-38.
[19]宋雅萍.论主体间性.马克思主义哲学研究,2008(1):198-207.
[20]陈建涛.论主体间性.人文杂志,1993(4):16-20.
[21]张弘.精英与乌克兰的政治转型.世界经济与政治论坛,2017(05):87-103.
[22]季诚.乌克兰地缘政治之殇.重庆:西南政法大学,2015.[23][美]尼古拉·梁赞诺夫斯基,马克·斯坦伯格.俄罗斯史.上海:上海人民出版社,2007:322.
[24] Benn Wedgwood D. Russian historians defend the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. International Affairs,2011,87(3):709–715.[25][英]哈·麦金德.历史的地理枢纽.北京:商务印书馆,2011:47-71.
[26]沈莉华.乌克兰融入欧洲战略及其对俄罗斯的影响.俄罗斯学刊,2012(3):36-43.
[27]黄登学.俄罗斯与乌克兰:从“敌手”到“盟友”.国际论坛,2011,13(1):27-33.
[28]李兴,周雪梅.乌克兰“橙色革命”:内外因素及其影响分析.俄罗斯中亚东欧研究,2005(4):64-68.
[29]靳会新.俄罗斯民族性格形成中的宗教信仰因素.俄罗斯学刊,2014,4(1):76-83.
[30]骆鸿儒.浅析基督教教义与西方宪政主义.才智,2013(17):171.
[31]靳会新.俄罗斯民族性格形成中的宗教信仰因素.俄罗斯学刊,2014,4(1):76-83.
[32]秦秋.俄罗斯民族性格成因浅析.重庆科技学院学报(社会科学版),2011(20):36-37+43.
[33][美]保罗·肯尼迪.大国的兴衰.北京:国际文化出版公司,2008:351.
[34]道平,睿涛,宇军,等.美俄军事实力大比拼.决策与信息,2013(2):14-17.
[2]陈凌雄.美俄较量中的乌克兰危机.观察与思考,2004(24):48.
[3]张文茹.克里米亚回归:俄罗斯的政策选择.和平与发展,2014(2):19-29.
[4]冯玉军.乌克兰危机:多维视野下的深层透视.国际问题研究,2014(3):48-63+131-132.
[5]王军.乌克兰危机的民族政治解读.国际安全研究,2014,32(4):27-38+155-156.
[6]张昕,冯绍雷.乌克兰危机的理论透视.世界经济与政治,2014(6):145-155+160.
[7]戴长征,张中宁.国内囿域下乌克兰危机的根源及其影响.东北亚论坛,2014(5):3-7
[8]丁原洪.乌克兰危机的历史经纬与现实启示.和平与发展,2014(2):1-8+116.
[9]柳丰华.乌克兰危机:内因、大国博弈因素与前景.俄罗斯学刊,2014,4(3):11-20.
[10]柳丰华.俄罗斯对乌克兰政策视角下的乌克兰危机.欧洲研究,2015,33(3):79-90+7.
[11]王志远.乌克兰危机的一种解读-基于国家特征视角的分析.欧洲研究,2015,33(6):114-135+7-8.
[12]胡志丁,刘卫东.论地缘战略的主体间性———兼论中国地缘战略抉择.人文地理,2016(3):122-127.
[13]杨在月,胡志丁,惠凯,等.论地缘战略区位的主体间性——以缅甸为例.世界地理研究,2017,26(2):1-10.
[14]金元浦.论文学的主体间性.天津社会科学,1997(5):85-90.
[15] Pim W Teunissen. When I say inter-subjectivity. Medical Education 2014,48:349-350.
[16] Lill-JohanneEilertsen. Maintaining inter-subjectivity when communication is challenging hearing impairment and complex needs.Research on Language and Social Interaction,2014,47(4):353-379.
[17] A.R. Lacey. A Dictionary of Philosophy. Routledge&Kegan Paul Ltd,1986.
[18]郭湛.论主体间性或交互主体性.中国人民大学学报,2001(3):32-38.
[19]宋雅萍.论主体间性.马克思主义哲学研究,2008(1):198-207.
[20]陈建涛.论主体间性.人文杂志,1993(4):16-20.
[21]张弘.精英与乌克兰的政治转型.世界经济与政治论坛,2017(05):87-103.
[22]季诚.乌克兰地缘政治之殇.重庆:西南政法大学,2015.[23][美]尼古拉·梁赞诺夫斯基,马克·斯坦伯格.俄罗斯史.上海:上海人民出版社,2007:322.
[24] Benn Wedgwood D. Russian historians defend the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. International Affairs,2011,87(3):709–715.[25][英]哈·麦金德.历史的地理枢纽.北京:商务印书馆,2011:47-71.
[26]沈莉华.乌克兰融入欧洲战略及其对俄罗斯的影响.俄罗斯学刊,2012(3):36-43.
[27]黄登学.俄罗斯与乌克兰:从“敌手”到“盟友”.国际论坛,2011,13(1):27-33.
[28]李兴,周雪梅.乌克兰“橙色革命”:内外因素及其影响分析.俄罗斯中亚东欧研究,2005(4):64-68.
[29]靳会新.俄罗斯民族性格形成中的宗教信仰因素.俄罗斯学刊,2014,4(1):76-83.
[30]骆鸿儒.浅析基督教教义与西方宪政主义.才智,2013(17):171.
[31]靳会新.俄罗斯民族性格形成中的宗教信仰因素.俄罗斯学刊,2014,4(1):76-83.
[32]秦秋.俄罗斯民族性格成因浅析.重庆科技学院学报(社会科学版),2011(20):36-37+43.
[33][美]保罗·肯尼迪.大国的兴衰.北京:国际文化出版公司,2008:351.
[34]道平,睿涛,宇军,等.美俄军事实力大比拼.决策与信息,2013(2):14-17.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |